|
Robert C. Howard (“Howard”) was admitted to
the practice of law in Wisconsin on October
4, 1996 (State Bar ID no. 1027903). Howard’s
State Bar address of record is 215 W. Court
St. Ste. 200, Janesville, Wisconsin 53548.
His law license is active and in good
standing.
In December of 2021, one of Howard’s clients
asked if he would be willing to meet with her
friend, Kristina Anderson (“Anderson”), to
discuss potentially representing her in a
custody case. Howard’s client informed him
that Anderson did not have much money and was
interested in a payment plan or a barter of
services. Howard’s client told him that she
and Ms. Anderson worked as adult entertainers
and that Ms. Anderson might be willing to
barter adult entertainment services for legal
representation.
Howard and Anderson met in Howard’s office on
December 22, 2021, and discussed the status
of her family court case. Anderson informed
Howard that she could not afford to pay the
$2,000 advanced fee that he required. Howard
suggested that Anderson could perform
delivery, errand or cleaning services at a
rate of $15 per hour to offset the advanced
fee.
Howard then presented another barter option
but informed Anderson that it would have to
be kept confidential and “just between them.”
Howard offered to accept sexually themed role
play with Anderson, including some physical
touching, in half hour sessions that he would
credit for $100 toward his $2,000 advanced
fee. Anderson left the December 22, 2021,
meeting without entering into any agreement
with Howard. After leaving Howard’s office on
December 22, 2021, Anderson contacted the
Janesville Police Department and reported
Howard’s offer.
On December 23, 2021, Howard e-mailed
Anderson stating;
“So, here is the breakdown of what our
agreement would be. You and I will sign an
agreement where you are paying me $2000 for
10 hours of my time. I bill at the rate of
$200 per hour by the tenth of the hour. You
are essentially receive (sic) this as a
credit which you pay back in one of the three
following ways:
1. Small payments of cash, check or money
order.
2. Exchange of services for administrative
support, errand running, etc. at the rate of
$15 per hour on an as needed basis.
3. Sessions as per our discussion at the rate
of $100 per half hour.”
Howard and Anderson met in Howard’s office
again on December 27, 2021, to discuss her
case but Anderson did not retain Howard’s
services. Anderson did not engage in any
sexually themed role playing with Howard and
there was never any physical contact between
them. The Janesville Police Department
determined that Howard’s actions did not
involve criminal conduct.
|
|
Howard attempted to accept sexually-themed
role play with his client that would have
included the intentional touching of the
intimate parts of a person. Because no prior
consensual relationship existed, this conduct
would have violated SCR 20:1.8(j), which
prohibits a lawyer from having sexual
relations with a current client unless a
consensual sexual relationship existed when
the client-lawyer relationship commenced. By
attempting to engage in this conduct, Howard
violated SCR 20:8.4(a), which states in
relevant part, “It is professional misconduct
for a lawyer to violate or attempt to violate
the Rules of Professional Conduct.”
ABA Comment 17 to SCR 20:1.8 states, in
pertinent part:
The relationship between lawyer and client is
a fiduciary one in which the lawyer occupies
the highest position of trust and confidence.
The relationship is almost always unequal;
thus, a sexual relationship between lawyer
and client can involve unfair exploitation of
the lawyer's fiduciary role, in violation of
the lawyer's basic ethical obligation not to
use the trust of the client to the client's
disadvantage…. Because of the significant
danger of harm to client interests and
because the client's own emotional
involvement renders it unlikely that the
client could give adequate informed consent,
this Rule prohibits the lawyer from having
sexual relations with a client regardless of
whether the relationship is consensual and
regardless of the absence of prejudice to the
client.
|
|
By discussing his interest in sexually themed
role play and offering to barter such play for
legal services Howard violated SCR 40.15, the
attorney’s oath, which states: “I will abstain
from all offensive personality.” SCR 40.15 is
enforceable via SCR 20:8.4(g), which states,
“It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to
violate the attorney’s oath.”
|
|
By discussing his interest in sexually themed
role play and offering to barter such play for
legal services Howard violated SCR 20:8.4(i),
which states: “It is professional misconduct
for a lawyer to harass a person on the basis of
sex, race, age, creed, religion, color,
national origin, disability, sexual preference,
or marital status in connection with the
lawyer’s professional activities.”
In accordance with SCR 22.09(3), Attorney
Robert C. Howard is hereby publicly
reprimanded.
Dated this 28th day of June, 2022.
|